Soul

Yeah-----that and the fact that back pain usually just gets progressively worse as time wears on even if you do stay in shape.

How many teams want him for 2nd base. How many teams NEED him for 2nd base? When was the last time he PLAYED second base. I say if the Cubs tell them they want him to lead off, but might need him at CF for 1 year before he goest o 2nd, and the price is right. Then I don't see how a cow would have to jump over the moon, before he joined the cubs. . I'll also see a cow jump over a moon before a team signs him to 5/20. NO TEAM in MLB is going to offer $100 million to Soriano, not even Texas. Best guess....Soriano ends up at 5 and $75. $75 million IS the better part of $100 million.

LOL, Soriano will agree to play CF for the Cubs right about the time cows jump over the Moon. You guys do realize he's one of the most prized F.A.'s out there, right? Not only is he going to cash in to the tune of the better part of $100 million, he can pretty much choose his team. Sound like a player who is begging for a job so much he's willing to switch positions? Not to me.

I still say this is the worst Cardinal team in 10 years. If they win it all, not only will it be incredibly ironic, but also a sad commentary on the state of major league baseball. And yes, I will puke too. I wonder if the ratings for this series will approach all-time lows. I know my own level of interest is almost non-existent. I'll watch Blackhawks hockey over a WS game this year.

The loss is huge because Brown was a great leader. I'm thinking this is going to drop us a notch as a defense......for now. Hopefully the bye week, combined with 2 home games against the 9ers and fins, will help Manning/Johnson/McGowan/Harris get into a bit of a groove. Certainly Brown can continue to mentor----his experience was expected to help Daneal to mature faster, and in the beginning of the season it was certainly helping. I love Mike Brown, but it is true he wasn't playing like he used to---he's one of my favorite Bears, I'll never forget those two OT INTs in 2001. One of the most magical sequences in all Bear history.

That's anger radiating off his skin. He hustled his way up to the podium. He just realized he was in Chicago.

I hope Lou is ready for the never-ending, freakish, melodramatic, "twingy," pseudo-injury soap opera that is Mark Prior.

This is a Dustyesque rationalization of a negative statistic. No it isn't. They ran well last year. Have the same people + a healthy Benson. Have focused most of their offense on the passing game. Dusty has nothing to do with it. So they're really not trying that hard to gain yardage when they hand the ball off? No, they just aren't putting any sort of emphasis on the running game. Last year they would repeatedly go to the run, even when the opposition knew they'd run. Occasionally, they'd be stuffed for no gain, but they'd keep at it and rack up yards. This year, if they don't gain 10 yards on a run play, the next play is a deep pass. They averaged 40 more yards per game and a full yard more per rush, and that was against stacked boxes last year. They are clearly capable of running the ball well. I suspect they will as the season goes on. Didn't they have 150 yards rushing against the Bills? And a pretty good amount the game before too? It's true they don't seem to be running the ball as well this year, but it's not a total collapse. And last night was just being down by 20 points----teams generally must throw when they're down, though they don't have to throw all long passes into double coverage like we did. The issue is, if the Bears do not attempt to run the ball, then the play action fake becomes useless. The Bears have been very successful with the play action this year. They kept running it, late into last night, and it was pointless. Interestingly enough, when you only run the ball 13 times, the play action loses it's effectiveness. If you're talking about last night, then yes. But for the entire year, we have had some success running the ball.

He must be getting signs from every team in baseball now, because he's doing the same "predictions" on the ESPN broadcasts. They aren't predictions anyway, just tidbits of info about what might come next, usually the kind that most astute baseball fans suspect anyway. Nevertheless, I enjoy listening to him. Stone is clearly one of the best color commentators in the game. And yes, he is also one of the most arrogant---though I don't think his arrogance can rival Joe Morgan. I agree he was wrong to leak info from player conversations. At the time, I just remember it becoming very clear through that entire ordeal that the Cubs were an unfocused, fragmented ballclub. From Mercker paying attention to the booth instead of the game, to everyone hating Sosa's admittedly tired act, to bickering about press coverage in general (not just the booth, mind you), to Dusty revealing himself as a manger who would not be able to right the ship through the tough times.......there was no doubt this team didn't have its head in the right place, or its managerial house in order.

Just wanted to chime in on this thread: I doubt Jimbo will say anything I haven't heard before, but vance's new sig is hilarious.

It means just because you were right about Baker doesn't show anything. It shows that it's possible to make a decision on somebody based on past performance. How about taking Piniella's World Series championship from 1990 and making a decision based on that?

It means just because you were right about Baker doesn't show anything.

He's going to turn into a big teddy bear. I can feel it. One year from now everyone will be asking where the fiery Piniella went.

I don't see the point in giving the benefit of the doubt to people who have a long history from which they can be judged. I hated on Baker before he was signed and never gave him the benefit of the doubt, and I think it's pretty clear I was justified. I don't have the same feelings on Lou, though. You can't use one example to prove the world. And besides, you have little choice but to give him a shot anyway----unless you're holding out on a huge stockpile of Tribune stock goony. Many Yankee fans hated on Torre when he took the NY job. His record wasn't exactly sparkling. I'd say they were dead wrong. Piniella has had some success. Not saying he will here, but I'll also bet if he doesn't, it won't be all his fault. Especially not with Hendry in the front office. I'm not doing cartwheels over this hiring, but hey whatever I'll give the old guy a chance. Once he proves himself incapable, then I'll start to complain.

This is a Dustyesque rationalization of a negative statistic. No it isn't. They ran well last year. Have the same people + a healthy Benson. Have focused most of their offense on the passing game. Dusty has nothing to do with it. So they're really not trying that hard to gain yardage when they hand the ball off? No, they just aren't putting any sort of emphasis on the running game. Last year they would repeatedly go to the run, even when the opposition knew they'd run. Occasionally, they'd be stuffed for no gain, but they'd keep at it and rack up yards. This year, if they don't gain 10 yards on a run play, the next play is a deep pass. They averaged 40 more yards per game and a full yard more per rush, and that was against stacked boxes last year. They are clearly capable of running the ball well. I suspect they will as the season goes on. Didn't they have 150 yards rushing against the Bills? And a pretty good amount the game before too? It's true they don't seem to be running the ball as well this year, but it's not a total collapse. And last night was just being down by 20 points----teams generally must throw when they're down, though they don't have to throw all long passes into double coverage like we did.

Don't you wonder if sweet Lou is thinking to himself, "dammit! should have waited a couple more weeks!" ?

I never hate on a new guy. Piniella gets the benefit of the doubt just like anyone else should. That said though, if the Cubs are really going to try and trade Zambrano for ARod like the rumors are suggesting, then I've got to wonder where the pitching is going to come from. Piniella had a great experience with ARod last time because that Mariners team was pretty solid-----complete with a Hall of Fame starter anchoring the rotation.

I just don't know why they kept throwing deep balls into double coverage. They needed to settle down a bit with some control throws. Obviously it's hard to know if it was all Rex, or all Turner, or a combination of both, but I've got to say it looked like those were just alot of designed longer routes being run. When your QB struggles, you've got to find a way to get him back into rhythm. We didn't do that last night, and that was disappointing. Also, the Mike Brown injury......he could be finished.........with basically no quality depth to sub for him now (although I must say Todd Johnson looked good last night).

LOL, otherwise known as "OH CRAP, I'M FIRED!!" 8)

I'm not sure what you are saying here. But, I'd go with Pie in CF if they somehow ended up with guys like ARod, Cabrera, etc. If not, then CF is a place where they need to find guaranteed improvemenent in production. If you want to go with Pie, then that's fine. I admit the point I'm trying to make is a little difficult. I'm just trying to say-----you can't make policy that tries to anticipate something that can't be anticipated. We'll wind up with some bench player in CF for 1 year because we "think" Pie will be ready to be an all-star in '08. We've seen this before---the guy you have in the minors turns out to be a dud, and you're left with another gaping hole in the lineup. Just make a solid decision for '07, and go with it. If that means you commit to Pie, then great. Do it. If that means you bring in a veteran on a multi-year deal, then fine go for it. But don't tip-toe around, saying Pie's not ready, and we can't sign anyone good because we're waiting for Pie-----and then you wind up with nothing.

I will only say this: tip-toeing our CF strategy around Felix Pie would be a mistake. There's no evidence proving he will ever be a great major league ballplayer. Solidify CF for the here & now. Let the Pie chip fall where it may. That's the only way it should be done. No "stop gaps" waiting for a player who may never arrive.

Great discussion, but a bit premature considering word out of SF is Piniella is heading west. Not saying it will happen-----just saying it looks like 2 teams consider Piniella to be in the bag, so something has to give.

Old Trap-Game as that is likely to light a fire under them and motivate them to kill anyone else. I think that's where I come down too. It's close though. You feel better in the moment if you lost to a good team. But losing to a good team puts that doubt in your mind-----maybe the Seahawks wasn't all it appeared.....maybe we'll have trouble in the playoffs against the good teams, etc. If you beat the Giants and Pats on the road, then I think everyone probably writes off a trap-game loss to, say, the Dolphins. I don't want to lose to a divisional opponent though, even if we are playing mostly 2nd teamers by that time. If those final games are meaningless, I'm hoping Lovie at least plays the starters for a little while. I'll take the injury risk this time around---I think we need to stay in rhythm heading into the playoffs.

Lou is not a brave choice, he's just the opposite. He is in fact the safest possible choice, which is why I predicted he'd be Hendry's favorite. Lou is the safest non-Girardi choice. Naw, Lou is safer. Girardi only managed one season and got fired. He's not officially proven yet. Lou's been around forever and had some good seasons. Girardi would give Hendry a lot of good will. Not hiring Girardi would piss a lot of people off. Lou is probably one of only a few guys that would placate the masses that would be pissed about Girardi not being here. And his big nameness is also the only competition for Girardi's story, as it pertains to PR. I'm not going to be upset if it's Lou. I'll give him a chance. He better not turn from short-tempered Lou into nice, cuddly Lou just because he's coming to the Cubs though. I've seen that movie before, and I don't like it. I'd rather have Girardi, because he did fairly well with an under-talented team which is what we have right now. Plus he might be able to survive the inevitable Hendry firing, which will be happening fairly soon. I don't buy that the fact he was fired by the Marlins means anything. Maybe he just wouldn't put up with their nonsense. Owners and GM's aren't always right, as every Cub fan should know.

Ahh, the life of a backup QB in the NFL. I could do that gig for a couple years. Hold a clipboard, rake in a few hundred grand per year..... Here's a question for you all. Let's assume the Bears are going 15-1 during the regular season. Do you want that loss to be against a legit team like the Patriots? Or would you prefer the old trap-game loss to a team like the Cardinals or the 49ers?